understanding bias and item missing data in...

45
Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology 2017 Annual Meeting Overcoming Measurement Challenges November 17, 2017 Philadelphia, PA Eman Abdu, Doug Salane and Peter Shenkin Center for Cybercrime Studies Mathematics & Computer Science Dept. John Jay College of Criminal Justice City University of New York

Upload: others

Post on 19-May-2020

26 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS

American Society of Criminology 2017 Annual Meeting

Overcoming Measurement ChallengesNovember 17, 2017

Philadelphia, PA

Eman Abdu,Doug Salane and Peter Shenkin

Center for Cybercrime StudiesMathematics & Computer Science Dept.

John Jay College of Criminal JusticeCity University of New York

Page 2: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Acknowledgements

Many students have contributed: Boris Bonderenko, Raul Cabrera and Henry Gallo

Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research(ICPSR) and National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD)

FBI, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, UCR/NIBRS Groups

NSF, NASA and NIJ

Page 3: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Goals

Provide back ground on FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS)

Demonstrate utility of having NIBRS data in a relational data base (Oracle 12c)

Examine NIBRS data issues: nonresponse bias and extent of item missing data

Briefly discuss ongoing work

Page 4: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

NIBRS Data Structure

• Group A offenses (53 crimes)– data on arrest, offense, offender, victim, property

– data on incident (administrative)

– 56 data elements in 6 main segments

• Group B offenses (11 crimes) – social crimes (victimless)– e.g., bad checks, disorderly conduct, driving under influence

– only recorded if there is an arrest

• new codes 2015: Identity theft (26F), Computer hacking (26G)

Page 5: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

NIBRS Data Structure

• NIBRS Group A offenses – data in 6 major files or segments

• An incident can have multiple segments: victims, offenders, offenses, arrestees, property records

• Tied together by Agency Identifier (ORI) and incident number

• 13 Segment files 6 group A, 1 group B, 3 Windows files, 3 Batch Files

Page 6: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

NIBRS Relational Database

• 59 Tables – 13 Segments + Codebook

• Enforces referential integrity – important when uploading new data

• Provides SQL query capability and processing capabilities (indices, partitioning, etc.)

• Extract required data and relationships

• Viewing and reporting tools

Page 7: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Sizes of NIBRS Segments

John Jay NIBRS Relational DatabaseSegment Type Record Counts

(in millions, first 7 rows)

’95-‘05 ’95-‘08 ‘95-’15

Columns (fields)

1.Administrative 29.1 44.1 79.7. 17

2.Offense 31.9 48.4 87.9 26

3.Property 33.3 50.7 93.8 25

4.Victim 31.7 48.2 88.0 55

5.Offender 32.9 50.0 90.8 12

6.Arrestee 8.0 12.4 23.9 21

7.Group B Arrest 9.9 14.6 26.5 19

8.Window Exceptional

Clearance

11,502 16, 611 38,357 27

9.Window Recovered

Property

7,086 11,074 18,952 35

10.Window Arrestee 156,791 179,559 241,187 32

Page 8: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Records per Segment in NIBRS

2015 2014 2010 2005 2000 1995

Administrative5,054,699 4,986,370 5,060,854 4,614,054 2,841,523 837,014

0ffense5,669,429 5,574,049 5,610,977 5,079,639 3,098,037 906,509

0ffender5,765,370 5,701,941 5,845,297 5,235,653 3,205,276 937,035

Victim5,677,586 5,587,973 5,636,428 5,067,759 3,075,362 889,743

Property 6.182,510 6,119,863 6,011,620 5,338,234 3,214,981 951,574

Arrestee1,671,621 1,667,262 1,606,460 1,334,625 769,630 227,090

Group B

Arrest

1,591,015 1,590,574 1,753,973 1,457,435 1,006,424 318,524

LEAs Reporting

6284 6258 5662 4862 3365 1255

Page 9: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

LEAs Reporting at Least One Incident

Year Number % Increase Year Number % Increase

1995 1255 2006 4841 3.4

1996 1487 18.5 2007 4935 2.0

1997 1738 16.9 2008 5184 5.0

1998 2249 29.4 2009 5595 8.0

1999 2852 26.8 2010 5662 1.2

2000 3365 18.0 2011 5874 3.7

2001 3611 7.3 2012 6086 3.6

2002 3809 5.5 2013 6129 .7

2003 4287 12.5 2014 6258 2.1

2004 4525 5.6 2015 6284 .4

2005 4682 3.5

Page 10: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Sum of COUNT(*) Column Labels

NIBRS RELEASE

YEAR between 1 and 10

between 11

and 100

between 101

and 1,000

between 1,001

and 10,000

between

10,001 and

more than

100,000 Grand Total

1995 111 380 585 170 9 1,255

1996 128 422 712 211 14 1,487

1997 118 477 830 292 21 1,738

1998 158 598 1,114 356 23 2,249

1999 241 771 1,385 427 28 2,852

2000 304 884 1,624 516 37 3,365

2001 310 1,022 1,665 567 46 1 3,611

2002 383 1,042 1,716 616 51 1 3,809

2003 473 1,128 1,987 645 53 1 4,287

2004 504 1,237 2,019 705 58 2 4,525

2005 475 1,222 2,144 775 64 2 4,682

2006 488 1,233 2,245 807 66 2 4,841

2007 480 1,278 2,276 827 71 3 4,935

2008 476 1,381 2,396 859 70 2 5,184

2009 508 1,561 2,589 866 69 2 5,595

2010 484 1,624 2,615 871 66 2 5,662

2011 512 1,712 2,678 902 69 1 5,874

2012 541 1,754 2,794 928 68 1 6,086

2013 562 1,788 2,828 887 64 6,129

2014 532 1,929 2,858 874 65 6,258

2015 523 1,913 2,899 881 68 6,284

Page 11: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology
Page 12: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology
Page 13: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology
Page 14: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology
Page 15: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Code Tables in NIBRS (Type Criminal Activity)

CODE DESCRIPTION • B Buying/Receiving • C Cultivating/Manufacturing/Publishing • D Distributing/Selling • E Exploiting Children • J Juvenile Gang Involvement • G Other Gang • N None/Unknown Gang Involvement • O Operating/Promoting/Assisting • P Possessing/Concealing • T Transporting/Transmitting/Importing • U Using/Consuming • I Intentional Abuse and Torture

Page 16: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Code Tables in NIBRS (Victim Offender Relationship )

CODE DESCRIPTION VO Victim was Offender

NA Not applicable AQ Victim was Acquaintance

SE Victim was Spouse FR Victim was Friend

CS Victim Common-Law Spouse NE Victim was Neighbor

PA Victim was Parent BE Victim was Babysittee (the baby)

SB Victim was Sibling BG Victim was Boyfriend/Girlfriend

CH Victim was Child CF Victim was Child of Boyfriend / Girlfriend

GP Victim was Grandparent HR Homosexual Relationship

GC Victim was Grandchild XS Victim was Ex-Spouse

IL Victim was In-Law EE Victim was Employee

SP Victim was Stepparent ER Victim was Employer

SC Victim was Stepchild OK Victim was Otherwise Known

SS Victim was Stepsibling RU Relationship Unknown

OF Victim other family member ST Victim was Stranger

Page 17: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Code Tables in NIBRS(Bias Motivation)

• 11 Anti-White • 12 Anti-Black or African American • 13 Anti-American Indian or Alaska Native • 14 Anti-Asian • 15 Multi-Racial Group • 21 Anti-Jewish • 22 Anti-Catholic • 23 Anti-Protestant • 24 Anti-Islamic (Moslem) • 25 Other Religion • 26 Multi-Religious Group • 27 Atheism/Agnosticism • 31 Anti-Arab • 32 Anti-Hispanic or Latino • 33 Anti-Not Hispanic or Latino • 41 Anti-Male Homosexual (Gay)

• 42 Anti-Female Homosexual (Lesbian) 43 Anti-Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or Transgender, Mixed Group (LGBT) • 43 Anti-Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, or Transgender, Mixed Group (LGBT) • 44 Anti-Heterosexual • 45 Anti-Bisexual • 51 Anti-Physical Disability • 52 Anti-Mental Disability • 88 None • 99 Unknown • 28 Anti-Mormon • 82 Anti-Other Christian • 84 Anti-Hindu • 85 Anti-Sikh • 61 Anti-Male • 62 Anti-Female • 71 Anti-Transgender • 72 Anti-Gender Non-Conforming • 16 Anti-Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

Page 18: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Entity Relationship(6 main segments)

Page 19: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology
Page 20: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology
Page 21: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Victim/Offender JoinORI

Code

Incident

Number

Offender

Sequence

No.

Offender

Age

Victim

Sequence

No.

Victim

Age

Incident

Date

1 CO0030400 CI0BRFRH-2 N 1 23 1 33 09-Nov-00

2 DE0020300 LT01KETVV0 N 0 00 1 39 16-DEC-02

3 DE0020600 LI01KVBRTU N 1 11 1 09 06-OCT-02

4 DE0020600 LI01KVBRTU N 1 11 2 08 06-OCT-02

5 DE0020600 LI01KVBRTU N 2 10 1 09 06-OCT-02

6 DE0020600 LI01KVBRTU N 2 10 2 08 06-OCT-02

7 DE0020600 LI01KVBRTU N 3 10 1 09 06-OCT-02

8 DE0020600 LI01KVBRTU N 3 10 2 08 06-OCT-02

9 DE0020600 LI01KVBRTU N 4 12 1 09 06-OCT-02

10 DE0020600 LI01KVBRTU N 4 12 2 08 06-OCT-02

11 IA0820200 7Z1C7REMQ-F 1 40 1 41 24-JAN-02

Page 22: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

NIBRS Incidents with Multiple Segments (1995-2015)

Total Incidents 79,672,672

SegmentOne Two Three Four

Arrestee

17,329,233 21.75% 2,207,330 2.77% 423,080 0.53% 123,535 0.16%

Offender

71,715,271 90.01% 5,950,932 7.47% 1,320,391 1.66% 436,482 0.55%

Offense

72,083,712 90.47% 6,927,813 8.70% 596,652 0.75% 56,083 0.07%

Victim

73,380,728 92.10% 5,168,540 6.49% 746,749 0.94% 205,587 0.26%

Page 23: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

NIBRS Incidents with Multiple Segments (2015)

Total Incidents 5,054,699

SegmentOne Two Three Four

Arrestee

1,259,886 24.93% 146,598 2.90% 24,349 0.48% 6,674 0.13%

Offender

4,532,042 89.66% 402,315 7.96% 80,674 1.60% 25,799 0.51%

Offense

4,504,537 89.12% 493,675 9.77% 49,541 0.98% 5,964 0.12%

Victim

4,585,143 90.71% 384,375 7.60% 56,808 1.12% 15,574 0.31%

Page 24: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

NIBRS Release Year

Incidents where

Release year is not the

same as Incident year

Percentage of

incidents where

release year not the

same as incident year

Total Release year

Records

2015 68,091 1.35% 5,054,699

2014 67,010 1.34% 4,986,370

2013 72,288 1.43% 5,070,862

2012 68,357 1.30% 5,261,649

2011 63,905 1.26% 5,084,696

2010 61,940 1.22% 5,060,854

2009 60,658 1.20% 5,052,752

2008 56,882 1.13% 5,016,841

2007 58,303 1.17% 5,003,962

2006 59,110 1.20% 4,906,781

2005 52,351 1.13% 4,614,054

2004 46,690 1.14% 4,083,571

2003 39,856 1.10% 3,637,432

2002 36,941 1.07% 3,455,589

2001 200 0.01% 3,232,281

2000 22,407 0.79% 2,841,523

1999 20,484 0.95% 2,157,326

1998 102 0.01% 1,822,675

1997 56 0.00% 1,426,978

1996 81 0.01% 1,064,763

1995 168 0.02% 837,014

NIBRS Released Year vs. Incident Year

(1995 – 2015 data sets)

Page 25: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Study of selected offenses where offender used a computer

• Illustrates use of spreadsheet pivot tables to select desired data

• Requires data from the offender and offense segments

• Provides age and gender breakdown of the offenders

• Examine selected offenses where offender used a computer

Page 26: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology
Page 27: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology
Page 28: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Spreadsheet Pivot Tables

Offender Counts (Offender suspected of using a computer)Aggregated by Offense, Age and

Gender Year

Offense

Description Age Group Gender 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Grand

Total

Embezzlement 11 – 20 F 11 7 5 8 8 14 53

M 4 5 6 8 6 7 36

20 – 30 F 17 18 19 22 20 29 125

M 11 13 14 14 12 23 87

31 – 40 F 9 9 18 20 13 31 100

M 8 9 12 7 12 13 61

41 – 50 F 5 7 7 6 8 21 54

M 3 8 4 4 4 10 33

51 – 60 F 2 4 1 1 4 12

M 1 4 2 3 10

Wire Fraud 11 – 20 F 1 3 3 4 2 2 15

M 9 9 9 13 13 12 65

20 – 30 F 1 6 3 6 14 16 46

M 7 12 18 22 27 22 108

31 – 40 F 3 2 8 9 8 30

M 4 8 11 12 13 21 69

41 – 50 F 1 5 3 3 3 6 21

M 4 2 2 8 4 5 25

51 – 60 F 1 3 1 2 4 11

M 2 2 2 1 1 6 14

Page 29: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Spreadsheet Pivot Tables

Offender Counts (Offender suspected of using a computer)

Aggregated by Offense, Age and Gender Year

Offense

Description Age Group Gender 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Grand

Total

Embezzlement 11 – 20 F 17 15 8 22 35 41 138

M 10 13 12 25 27 23 110

20 – 30 F 42 47 47 82 58 83 359

M 31 45 35 67 64 75 317

31 – 40 F 31 40 36 60 72 53 292

M 29 23 26 24 35 38 175

41 – 50 F 24 25 29 28 32 35 173

M 8 16 12 21 16 26 99

51 – 60 F 12 8 11 13 8 18 70

M 4 10 3 12 8 9 46

Impersonation 11 – 20 F 24 17 23 45 30 39 178

M 23 25 46 119 56 47 316

20 – 30 F 58 73 99 110 121 123 584

M 110 78 109 112 129 153 691

31 – 40 F 60 57 61 110 100 128 516

M 52 57 84 111 112 129 545

41 – 50 F 33 44 51 61 55 61 305

M 31 41 54 53 81 76 336

51 – 60 F 13 12 14 29 23 26 117

M 19 19 31 38 32 43 182

Page 30: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

BIAS due to Non Response

• Compare UCR and NIBRS reporting

• Examine Breakdown of Violent and Property Crimes in NIBRS and UCR

• Examine Larceny in NIBRS and UCR

Page 31: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

NIBRS and UCRNIBRS

• 33 states certified, 38% report all crime in NIBRS

• Covers 30% of US population (96 million )

• 29% of all crime, 18 LEAs cover Group I cities

• 6648 LEAs participated in 2015, over 7000 in 2016

UCR

• 16,643 LEAs submitted data to UCR (18,439 total )

• Includes major municipalities, 83 LEAs covering Group I cities

• Mainly summary data but with some incident data

Page 32: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Breakdown of Violent Crimes

UCR Data and NIBRS

Crime Type UCR

(2014)

NIBRS

(2014)

UCR

(2015)

NIBRS

(2015)

NIBRS Data

(1995-2015)

Aggravated Assault 63.61% 62.29% 63.8% 62.44% 62.84%

Murder/Nonnegligent

Manslaughter1.22% 1.28% 1.30% 1.44% 1.17%

Rape (legacy definition) 7.21% 10.91% 7.50% 11.29% 10.04%

Robbery 27.96% 25.51% 27.30% 24.83% 25.96%

Page 33: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Increase in Violent Crimes

UCR and NIBRS (2013-2015)

Crime 2013 2014 2015

UCR NIBRS UCR NIBRS UCR NIBRS

murder 14,196 3,445 14,249 3,499 15,696 4,123

% increase .37% 1.57% 10.16% 17.83%

rape 79,770 28,855 84,041 29,723 90,185 32,279

% increase 5.35% 3.01% 7.31% 8.60%

robbery 341,031 73,354 325,802 69,512 327,374 70,923

% increase -4.47% -5.24% 0.48% 2.03%

aggravated

assault724,149 165,395 741,291 169,728 764,449 178,511

% increase 2.37% 2.62% 3.12% 5.17%

Page 34: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

NIBRS Breakdown of Violent Crime

(1995 – 2015)

1995(1) – 2015(21)

Page 35: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Breakdown of Property Crimes

UCR and NIBRS

(2014 and 2015)

Crime Type UCR

(2014)

UCR % NIBRS

(2014)

NIBRS % UCR(2015)

UCR % NIBRS

(2015)

NIBRS %

Burglary 1,729,496 20.90% 486,554 20.24% 1,579,527 19.76% 461,674 19.44%

Larceny 5,858,496 70.77% 1,736,384 72.24% 5,706,346 71.39% 1,724,328 72.60%

Motor Vehicle

Theft689.527 8.33% 180,822 7.52% 707,758 8.85% 189,072 7.96%

Page 36: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Breakdown of Property Crimes

NIBRS

(1995 - 2015)

Crime Type NIBRS

(1995-2015) NIBRS %

Burglary 8,252,514 21.27%

Larceny 27,352,884 70.50%

Motor Vehicle

Theft3,192,197 8.23%

Page 37: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Breakdown of Property Crimes

NIBRS /UCR Trends

(2014 to 2015)

Crime Type

UCR NIBRS

Burglary -8.67% -5.11%

Larceny -2.60% -0.69%

Motor Vehicle

Theft2.64% 4.56%

Page 38: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Larceny

Burglary

Motor Vehicle

Breakdown of Property Crime

NIBRS (1995-2015)

1995(1) – 2015(21)

Page 39: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Comparison of Larceny Details

UCR and NIBRS 2014 Data

(offense counts)

UCR Data NIBRS Data

Larceny Type Counts percentages Counts percentages

Pocket-picking 27,465 0.54% 6,884 0.40%

Purse-snatching 20,660 0.40% 5,653 .33%

shoplifting 1,097,444 21.47% 378,153 21.78%

From motor vehicles

(except accessories)

1,172,876 22.95% 358,120 20.62%

Motor vehicle

accessories

359,490 7.03% 79,794 4.60%

bicycles 184,575

3.61% 0 0%

From buildings 626,572

12.26% 225,598 12.98%

From coin-operated

machines

11,728 .23% 3970 .23%

All others 1,610,734 31.51% 678,212 39.06%

Totals 5,111,544 100% 1,736,384 100%

Page 40: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Comparison of Larceny Details

UCR and NIBRS 2015 Data

(offense counts)

UCR Data NIBRS Data

Larceny Type Counts percentages Counts percentages

Pocket-picking 28,532 0.5% 7,079 0.41%

Purse-snatching 22,825 0.4% 5,433 .32%

shoplifting 1,273,656 22.32% 390,971 22.67%

From motor vehicles

(except accessories)

1,370,664 24.02% 372,031 21.58%

Motor vehicle accessories 399,444 7.0% 77,014 4.47%

bicycles 205,428

3.6% 0 0%

From buildings 663,648

11.63% 214,311 12.43%

From coin-operated

machines

11,413 .2% 3,804 .22%

All others 1,730,735 30.33% 653,685 37.91%

Totals 5,706,345 100% 1,724,328 100%

Page 41: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Item Missing Data

• NIBRS has 53 data elements most of which are mandatory

• Data elements such as demographics of victim and offenders, relationships victim/offender and others are of interest to researchers and policy makers

• Compare rates of missing data in NIBRS and other sources such as SHR

• Examine item missing data in murders

Page 42: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

NIBRS Unknown Murder Victim Information

(1995-2015)

victims Unknown age Unknown race Unknown gender

1995 458 6 1.31% 6 1.31% 0 0.00%

1996 643 13 2.02% 7 1.09% 3 0.47%

1997 749 18 2.40% 10 1.34% 0 0.00%

1998 975 39 4.00% 21 2.15% 7 0.72%

1999 1230 34 2.7% 27 2.20% 6 0.49%

2000 1695 82 4.84% 52 3.07% 17 1.00%

2001 1958 85 4.34% 49 2.50% 15 0.77%

2002 2053 95 4.63% 53 2.58% 15 0.73%

2003 2132 65 3.05% 52 2.44% 7 0.33%

2004 2358 104 4.41% 58 2.46% 21 0.89%

2005 3320 122 3.67% 76 2.29% 13 0.39%

2006 3404 111 3.26% 66 1.94% 25 0.73%

2007 3420 97 2.84% 62 1.81% 16 0.47%

2008 3252 97 2.98% 93 2.86% 28 0.86%

2009 3457 79 2.29% 54 1.56% 8 0.23%

2010 3430 46 1.34% 49 1.43% 9 0.26%

2011 3544 47 1.33% 77 2.17% 13 0.37%

2012 3689 52 1.41% 62 1.68% 11 0.30%

2013 3551 57 1.61% 57 1.61% 14 0.39%

2014 3596 49 1.36% 73 2.03% 23 0.64%

2015 4234 58 1.37% 71 1.68% 14 0.33%

Page 43: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

NIBRS Unknown Offender Information1

(1995-2015)

Victims Offender

missing

unknown

demographics

unknown

age

unknown

race

unknown

gender

1995 458 4.37% 7.64% 6.99% 5.68% 4.80%

1996 643 7.93% 7.62% 7.00% 6.69% 5.29%

1997 749 10.41% 9.35% 8.14% 7.21% 6.28%

1998 975 7.08% 9.85% 8.82% 6.77% 5.23%

1999 1230 9.02% 9.27% 7.97% 7.64% 5.93%

2000 1695 9.44% 15.16% 14.40% 10.86% 9.79%

2001 1958 11.90% 11.64% 10.73% 8.27% 7.46%

2002 2053 10.23% 12.96% 11.69% 8.91% 7.60%

2003 2132 11.30% 12.24% 10.79% 9.29% 7.88%

2004 2358 10.69% 15.18% 13.02% 11.28% 9.16%

2005 3320 11.20% 19.94% 17.95% 14.46% 12.02%

2006 3404 11.72% 18.51% 16.69% 12.66% 11.05%

2007 3420 12.54% 15.26% 13.57% 9.30% 7.63%

2008 3252 13.47% 14.94% 12.67% 10.61% 8.30%

2009 3457 12.09% 15.33% 13.51% 9.98% 7.84%

2010 3430 13.29% 14.46% 13.27% 9.04% 7.49%

2011 3544 12.39% 15.77% 14.11% 10.38% 8.94%

2012 3689 13.53% 15.83% 14.10% 10.11% 8.65%

2013 3551 12.56% 14.81% 13.38% 9.63% 8.39%

2014 3596 11.43% 14.35% 12.26% 10.65% 8.79%

2015 4234 13.51% 14.65% 14.27% 11.45% 9.54%1The unit of analysis is victims.

Page 44: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Ongoing Work

• Time series studies to examine NIBRS missing data, victim-offender relationships, circumstances, location and weapon used

• Extract data for specific studies and make it available in Excel Pivot Tables or Data Cubes

• Examine effects of police reporting practices on the data, e.g., inaccurate incident times

• Prepare for additional NIBRS reporting. DOJ, OJP, BJS and FBI program to create a nationally representative crime sample and NIBRS compliant operational systems increasing NIBRS reporting. (Mainly an IT effort)

• Make the relational database publicly available through use of the Oracle Data Pump utility

Page 45: Understanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRSweb.math.jjay.cuny.edu/abstracts/NIBRS_ASC_2017.pdfUnderstanding Bias and Item Missing Data in NIBRS American Society of Criminology

Thank You

Eman Abdu

Doug Salane and Peter Shenkin

[email protected]

212 237-8836

Center for Cybercrime Studies

Math & CS Dept.

John Jay College of Criminal Justice